www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Vote for std.uni

reply "Jesse Phillips" <Jesse.K.Phillips+D gmail.com> writes:
This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry 
Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of 
fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures.

If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos 
please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what 
condition, otherwise vote no.

In summary, most discussion revolved around the string based 
functions for toLower/toUpper and where they should live.

Please place any further comments in the official review thread 
leaving only your vote and a short comment (there should be no 
need to reply to anyone).

Docs:
http://blackwhale.github.io/phobos/uni.html

Source:
https://github.com/blackwhale/phobos/tree/new-std-uni
Stand Alone: https://github.com/blackwhale/gsoc-bench-2012

Review Thread:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/xbuphdghoyymjajpfzki forum.dlang.org

Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting.
May 19 2013
next sibling parent Alix Pexton <alix.DOT.pexton gmail.DOT.com> writes:
On 20/05/2013 07:18, Jesse Phillips wrote:

 This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry
 Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental
 Unicode algorithms and data structures.


I vote YES!

A...
May 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Joshua Niehus" <jm.niehus gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:

 Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting.


2014?

vote: yes
May 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Jesse Phillips" <Jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:

 Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting.


Err, May 26.
May 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Brian Schott" <briancschott gmail.com> writes:
Yes.
May 20 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:

 This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry 
 Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of 
 fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures.


I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode . As said in the 
other thread : uni can be unicode, but also unique, union, unit, 
uniform, unix,
unijambist, whatever.

When theses pile up in a large library, this is more and more 
difficult to rely on intuition/autocompletion and much more on 
programmer's memory. It mean that it takes longer to learn the 
whole library.

Overall, the module is good I think and my vote is yes.
May 20 2013
parent reply "eles" <eles eles.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 01:37:59 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:



 I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode.


I second that. I understand that is unpleasant, but better to 
make the effort now than later.

Transition should be, also, smoother: old code will continue to 
work with current std.uni module, that will be marked as 
deprecated, while new code will use the proposed module, named 
std.unicode.
May 21 2013
parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, May 21, 2013 10:31:56 eles wrote:

 On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 01:37:59 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
 
 I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode.


 
 I second that. I understand that is unpleasant, but better to
 make the effort now than later.


I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and 
breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to 
have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii.


 Transition should be, also, smoother: old code will continue to
 work with current std.uni module, that will be marked as
 deprecated, while new code will use the proposed module, named
 std.unicode.


Were there even any functions in std.uni which get deprecated as part of this 
change. I don't remember any, but I'd have to check. But either way, changing 
the module name would introduce 100% breakage in the module's usage and for 
little to no gain IMHO.

- Jonathan M Davis
May 21 2013
next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 08:40:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for 
 little gain and
 breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that 
 you're likely to
 have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with 
 std.ascii.


That is true, but an alias can be easily created.


 Were there even any functions in std.uni which get deprecated 
 as part of this
 change. I don't remember any, but I'd have to check. But either 
 way, changing
 the module name would introduce 100% breakage in the module's 
 usage and for
 little to no gain IMHO.


We can still have std.uni for any period of time still available. 
Right now is the best moment for a change. We don't even need to 
break something.
May 21 2013
prev sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-05-21 10:40, Jonathan M Davis wrote:


 I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and
 breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to
 have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii.


I would make the opposite argument. Shortening "unicode" to "uni" gains 
nothing at all.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
May 21 2013
parent reply "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz> writes:
On Tue, 21 May 2013 13:23:07 +0100, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 On 2013-05-21 10:40, Jonathan M Davis wrote:


 I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little  
 gain and
 breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're  
 likely to
 have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii.


 I would make the opposite argument. Shortening "unicode" to "uni" gains  
 nothing at all.


Agreed.  I was briefly and initially confused as to what std.uni was, had  
it been called std.unicode it would have been immediately obvious instead.

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
May 21 2013
parent Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
21-May-2013 16:33, Regan Heath пишет:

 On Tue, 21 May 2013 13:23:07 +0100, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 On 2013-05-21 10:40, Jonathan M Davis wrote:


 I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little
 gain and
 breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're
 likely to
 have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii.


 I would make the opposite argument. Shortening "unicode" to "uni"
 gains nothing at all.


 Agreed.  I was briefly and initially confused as to what std.uni was,
 had it been called std.unicode it would have been immediately obvious
 instead.

 R


Created new thread. Let's stop diverging this one.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
May 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Jakob Ovrum" <jakobovrum gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:

 If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into 
 Phobos please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify 
 under what condition, otherwise vote no.


Yes, please.

Thank you Dmitry for your excellent work.
May 21 2013
parent Timothee Cour <thelastmammoth gmail.com> writes:
Yes.

And I also vote for renaming to std.unicode; now would be the best time to
rename. This could be done with compiler's or a tool that uses the
compiler, at the very least a friendly error message.
May 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
Yes.
May 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam Wilson" <flyboynw gmail.com> writes:
On Sun, 19 May 2013 23:18:12 -0700, Jesse Phillips  
<Jesse.K.Phillips+D gmail.com> wrote:


 This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry  
 Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental  
 Unicode algorithms and data structures.

 If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos please  
 vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what condition,  
 otherwise vote no.

 In summary, most discussion revolved around the string based functions  
 for toLower/toUpper and where they should live.

 Please place any further comments in the official review thread leaving  
 only your vote and a short comment (there should be no need to reply to  
 anyone).

 Docs:
 http://blackwhale.github.io/phobos/uni.html

 Source:
 https://github.com/blackwhale/phobos/tree/new-std-uni
 Stand Alone: https://github.com/blackwhale/gsoc-bench-2012

 Review Thread:
 http://forum.dlang.org/post/xbuphdghoyymjajpfzki forum.dlang.org

 Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting.


Yes.

With a +1 for std.unicode or std.encoding.unicode

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
May 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
yes

-Steve
May 21 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz> writes:
Yes
May 22 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 08:18:12AM +0200, Jesse Phillips wrote:

 This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry
 Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of
 fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures.
 
 If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos
 please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what
 condition, otherwise vote no.


[...]

Yes!


T

-- 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
	-- Bertrand Russell.

"How come he didn't put 'I think' at the end of it?"
	-- Anonymous
May 22 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Monday, May 20, 2013 08:18:12 Jesse Phillips wrote:

 If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos
 please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what
 condition, otherwise vote no.


Yes.

I wish that I'd managed to review the module more thoroughly before this, but 
I didn't manage to, and from what I've seen, I suspect that I'd need to study 
up on Unicode a lot more to give a particularly in depth review of it anyway. 
On some level, we just have to trust that Dmitry knows what he's doing with 
this incredibly complicated subject (particularly those of us who don't know 
it well enough ourselves).

- Jonathan M Davis
May 23 2013
parent reply "Oleg Kuporosov" <Oleg.Kuporosov gmail.com> writes:
Yes

Thanks,
Oleg.
May 23 2013
parent reply Jerry <jlquinn optonline.net> writes:
Yes.

Titlecasing support is missing.  I assume that can be added in?

Thanks,
Jerry
May 24 2013
parent Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> writes:
25-May-2013 02:17, Jerry пишет:

 Yes.

 Titlecasing support is missing.  I assume that can be added in?


Yup, was working on it just yesterday ;)
Even if it doesn't get in with initial merge I plan to add few missing 
things in due course with pulls (notably collation).


 Thanks,
 Jerry



-- 
Dmitry Olshansky
May 24 2013
prev sibling parent "Jesse Phillips" <Jesse.K.Phillips+D gmail.com> writes:
I'm voting yes.
May 25 2013